Related Articles

In total, 76,576 patients had a hip replacement during that time period.

Of those who had a traditional operation 1.2 per cent had to have the joint replaced again within three years, while of those who had the new type, known as hip resurfacing, 2.6 per cent needed another operation within the same period of time.

Of the 80,697 patients who underwent a knee replacement, between 1.4 per cent who had the traditional operation had to have repeat surgery within three years.

For patients who had the new type of knee replacement, in which only the damaged knee compartment and not the whole knee is replaced, called unicompartmental knee surgery, that figure was 2.8 per cent.

Overall eight per cent of patients were given the new type of hip replacement and five per cent the new type of knee replacement.

Professor Alan Silman, director of the Arthritis Research Campaign, said the study showed that overall revision rates were very low but added: "The fact that revision rates are highest for hip resurfacing and unicompartmental knee is not surprising as they are both fairly new surgical techniques that have not been subjected to clinical trials.

"There is obviously a need for a more formal type of assessment for these newer types of surgery."

John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, which carried out the research, also emphasised the small numbers of cases which required further surgery.

He said: "Hip and knee operations are among the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the country and there are many different types of prosthesis and operative techniques with new ones being developed all the time.

"It is a pleasure to note just how good these results are, a credit to the nation's orthopaedic surgeons and their teams.

"By having a national registry and linking with routinely collected patient data we can quickly evaluate these technical innovations and ensure patients get the best possible outcomes from their surgery, even better than they are at the moment."

The study, published in the journal PLoS Medicine, was carried out using the National Joint Registry (NJR), and is the first of its kind.